“We are not asking for alot from a few European Americans, but we are asking for a little from many.”

Conservative talk show host and author Mark Levin’s new book, “Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto,” has just hit the bookstores and from what I’ve been hearing over the last few days it has been well received, to say the least. Mr. Levin’s fellow conservatives have done nothing but rave over this book, describing it in almost mystical terms with one reviewer describing Mr. Levin as the new Thomas Paine. Apparently, conservatives in Washington have forgotten who they are and what they stand for; so Mr. Levin has written a succinct yet defining instruction aid for not only our elected officials who claim to be conservative, but also for firing up the masses, who will in turn — be more conservative. In the era of Saul Alinsky’s acolyte Barack Hussein Obama this book apparently could not have come at a better time.

No, I haven’t read Mark Levin’s book. Regardless, I’m going to comment on its high-profile release, my impression of the excerpts I’ve seen, and the media reaction I’ve been observing. The gist I’m getting from the pundits and book reviewers is that this volume will allegedly resonate with greenhorn conservatives & old guard conservatives for ages to come; defining once and for all without a hint of obscurity what the founding fathers intended for the United States to be and how its government should operate. Basically, Levin’s book says government should exist only for the preservation of liberty; that it should not allow for a federal establishment that continues to expand no matter who (or what party) happens to control the executive branch. In his book he describes an out of control federal bureaucracy as a malignant intrusive creature.
“It churns out a mind-numbing number of rules that regulate energy, the environment, business, labor, employment, transportation, housing, agriculture, food, drugs, education, etc. Even the slightest human activity apparently requires its intervention: clothing labels on women’s dresses, cosmetic ingredients, and labeling. It even reaches into the bathroom, mandating showerhead flow rates and allowable gallons per flush for toilets. It sets flammability standards for beds.”

Well, who in his right mind wouldn’t agree with that assessment?

In fact the few times I’ve listened to Mr. Levin host his radio program he has stuck to this argument faithfully describing a bloated federal government that creates a “culture of conformity and dependency, where the ideal citizen takes on drone-like qualities in service to the state, where persons must be bled dry of individuality and confidence, and frightened away from independent thoughts and behavior.” Instead Mr. Levin envisions a society where the American citizen “is recognized and accepted as more than an abstract statistic or faceless member of some group; rather, he is a unique, spiritual being with a soul and a conscience.”

Mark Levin also points out how the 17th Amendment, ratified in 1917, stripped state power from the state legislatures of the authority to appoint senators and purposely deprived them of a meaningful role in the federal government, thus giving the citizenry an unfamiliar sense of the Constitution. Of course we can also thank the “statists” version of education for that sorry state of affairs.

Overall, there doesn’t seem to be much to disagree with here. So without having read the book “Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto,” and listening to the accolades from his high profile conservative allies I come away from all this with the impression that Mark Levin believes the size of the federal government must be decreased; that Republicans have lost their promise to limited government and have become the party of big government. Mr. Levin seems to oppose appropriations not authorized within the enumerated powers of the Constitution- a Constitution that each member of Congress swore to uphold. He definitely wants to lower taxes and has railed in the past that the current income tax laws assume that people are guilty and they have to prove they are innocent. He condemns the role of the Federal Reserve for the national debt and for creating inflation; that Congress needs to cut down on spending, reassess monetary and spending policies, and stop borrowing heavily from foreign investors. Yes, this all sounds good to me. I think we can safely assume his book’s message, which is rooted in the legacy of the founding fathers, will be greeted warmly and enthusiastically from not only his loyal conservative listeners but also to his associates in government — who are legion.

Failures Of Our Age

Sounds good, doesn’t it? With the release of this book are we finally going to see a return to limited government and a universal conviction to personal freedom, freedom of association, morality, etc at the skilled hands of a truly Constitution oriented president, legislature and judiciary? I doubt it. Why? Well because we as nation, not to mention Mark Levin, had that chance but it was flushed away. All of the above position statements, all of the clear, minimal, states’ rights oriented constitutional mandates accompanied by the philosophical underpinnings that originated in Europe and were transferred here by the Founding Fathers that Mark Levin extols – was expressed almost perfectly when Dr. Ron Paul was running for president. But you see, for the same policies he claims to adhere to and long for in our nation Mark Levin excoriated, insulted, diminished and attacked Ron Paul and his supporters better than any liberal Marxist “statist” could have ever done. He and his pals Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and other neoconservatives ignored and pooh-poohed Dr. Paul’s nearly identical platform contained in Mark Levin’s book; and moreover which utter from their crooked mouths on a daily basis from their radio perches. No, Rudolph Giuliani John McCain, Mike Huckabee, Fred Thompson and others were the preferred choice because they all sang from the same globalist war bird sheet music prepared by the supporters of their corporate organizers.

Moreover, all of these “candidates” subscribe to racial and cultural equality and racial blending — to the point of believing and having us believe the Founders could have been Mexicans who created the “shining city on the hill” we are now allegedly composed of. It was –and is—media ghouls and parasites like Levin that shape mold and characterize the political landscape, who point out the parallel path of the Marxist “statists” that people should take — in order to arrive at a place where even demagogue leftist are comfortable. Putting aside the inevitable policy differences we may have had with Dr. Paul, among them being he did not possess one single white preservationist bone in his body, our chance to at least struggle and rebuild a truly Constitutional government with Ron Paul at the helm was subverted by people like Mark Levin, a fraud and influence peddler if ever there was one.
So why did he write his damned book?

Levin’s reservations about Ron Paul had nothing to do with racism. My reservations about Ron Paul had nothing to do with racism either. When it comes to fiscal and social conservatism, I think most of us who call ourselves conservatives DO agree with Ron Paul. Our big disagreement with Paul lies in his isolationist views on national security and his unwillingness to be a “Friend of Israel.” Of course, you would have known this if you had read the book before proclaiming that Paul’s platform was “nearly identical [to the platform] contained in Mark’s book.”

Of course, the term isolationist has come to signify a form of hermit-like proclivities. North Korea is isolationist, for example, and I don’t see the USA dropping even close to that level of psychosis under a Paul administration.

As for Israel, well, I think Dr. Paul’s hang up has more to do with meddling intervention and fiscal irresponsibility than being anti-Israel or worse anti-Semitism.